All Ram 1500, 2500, and 3500 pickups are now J2807 compliant, meaning they meet or exceed the Society of Automotive Engineers' agreed upon standard and criteria for measuring and rating tow standards. In fact, Ram states that all of its current tow ratings will stay the same, and in some special instances, will actually be up-rated with the new requirements.

"Ram Truck has been preparing for integration of the SAE towing standard over the past few years and adding heavier 3/4- and 1-ton trucks to the criteria gives it more teeth," said Mike Cairns, director of Ram truck engineering, in a statement. "For too long, an uneven playing field existed and towing capacities went unchecked. We're happy to be the only pickup truck manufacturer to align with the SAE J2807 towing standard across our pickup truck lineup."

Here's a sample of the current maximum towing capacities for the full range of 2015 Ram trucks:

The new standards, which have gone through several subtle changes in recent months, are now likely to officially encompass vehicles with 14,000-pound gross vehicle weight ratings, including all three-quarter- and one-ton pickups. Ram is the first truckmaker to announce that its full lineup of pickups adheres to the criteria, so you can expect others to follow suit shortly. Even now, we've heard rumblings that since both GM and Ford knew these changes to HD pickups were coming, they've been preparing for this requirement for some time. We're sure there will be more to announce later.

Good work, the towing ratings are astonishing nowadays, power is not the problem, its stopping and handling that concerns me with the average consumer.

A 10K lb RV trailer is much more dangerous than a flatbed hauling the same weight in landscaping supplies. It is amazing that there aren't more RV crashes, as the majority of people have no clue on properly leveling the trailers.

Posted by: Mopar212222 | Jul 16, 2014 9:53:42 AM

Way to go Ram, now can you explain what the standard is and how it works exactly?

Posted by: Andy | Jul 16, 2014 9:55:34 AM

1. Was there a rabbit pulled out of a hat too?
2. How much Holy Water did Fiat executives have to share with the various agencies who govern this stuff for such a miracle to come forth?

My morning dose of snark aside, we should cheer when any of the big makers adopt such a standard rating system instead of the old hocus pocus that they used formerly.

Posted by: papa jim | Jul 16, 2014 10:03:11 AM

Why does Ram only advertise towing numbers for regular cab trucks? Who the F besides fleets buys a regular cab? Why don't they advertise the towing numbers of their crew cabs like the rest of the competition?

Posted by: ALL1 | Jul 16, 2014 10:11:45 AM

So far I like how well they fared because right now they did better than Toyota but not as well as GM as GM started with a higher max tow rating.

I would like a breakdown though as to which cab configurations did how well like crew cab 4x4 and crew cab 4x2, quad cab 4x4 and quad cab 4x2. Now I have to be fair and say the Max Tow is usually a regular cab and they tend to lose less capacity. This is a fair request ab both Toyota and GM provided that breakdown.

Posted by: AD | Jul 16, 2014 10:16:54 AM

Where is dim light bulb TRX tom he said the Ram 1500 would out tow and haul the GM twin 1500s when Ram finally becomes J2807 compliant. Looks like the numbers prove the RAM 1500 is the weaks half ton around, the numbers prove dim light bulb TRX tom is wrong again!

Do these standards not apply to payload capacities? I was fully expecting the already low payload capacity of ram 1500 trucks to go down, and I see no mention of it in the press release.

Posted by: beebe | Jul 16, 2014 10:29:57 AM

Re the comment about braking, that's very true but don't forget these trailers also have brakes. Plus, the standards, I believe, include braking ability. Don't meet the braking requirements then you can't get the tow rating. So while braking is still something to be cognizant of, it's not like these trucks carry big tow ratings without the ability to stop them. That's part of the standards. We are fulltime rv'ers who have been towing a 15,000+ pound fifthwheel around the country for the past 11 years, so we are well aware of braking issues.

The more important is what I think all of us knew all along. These trucks are pretty much equal across the board, now that the ratings are normalized its pretty much pick whichever one is at the features and pricepoint you want and be happy. Sucks for marketing though. Well unless Ford still doesn't comply, in which case GM and Ram are going to have a field day with it.

Posted by: devilsadvocate | Jul 16, 2014 10:56:22 AM

"in fact, Ram states that all of its current tow ratings will stay the same, and in some special instance...."

Not a fact according to other sites. The PR from Ram is only talking about increases, but one site says "most" and another says 99% stayed the same or increased. This means some of the ratings dropped. What were the 1% that were lowered, PUTC?

Also, I believe Ram lowered some ratings in advance on the 2014 models, Power Wagon dropped a few hundred lbs. The EcoDiesel came out in 2014 with some low ratings, 495 lb payload in one calculation on PUTC. The Laramie Limited is rated for 881 lbs on the website. Pretty hard to lower this when it was lowered in 2014.

Overall you're not going to see a big difference because the j2807 testing protocalls are not too difficult to comply with. It is more of a feel good exercise.

Some did go down. Ram doesn't want to talk about the 1% or whatever number that were lowered. Also, Ram lowered some payload ratings in 2014.

Posted by: paul | Jul 16, 2014 10:59:59 AM

@AD

The numbers here are for regular cabs only and they drop for crew cabs. A comparable crew cab Tundra 5.7L 2wd and crew cab Ram 5.7L 2wd are almost identical in their tow rating.

Posted by: ALL1 | Jul 16, 2014 11:06:22 AM

@ALL1
I try to give credit where it is due and so far from that release Ram fared better than Toyota but this release is the least informative of the bunch. Why I said Ram did better than Toyota is the fact that all Tundra models lost capacity but the crewmwx 4x4 lost the most of any 1/2 ton so far at 1,100lbs and Ram 1500 has 250lb more capacity than the Tundra overall http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/08/toyota-lowers-trailering-ratings-gains-credibility.html. I didn't see your initial post as you must have been typing at the same time as me but we both thought something was missing from Ram's release.

Posted by: AD | Jul 16, 2014 11:32:22 AM

@Mileage Man J2807 does address payload capacity.

The gross combination weight rating (also Gross Combination Mass and maximum authorised mass), which can be abbreviated to GCM, MAM, GCWR is the maximum allowable combined mass of a towing road vehicle, passengers and cargo in the tow vehicle, plus the mass of the trailer and cargo in the trailer.[

As Paul pointed out, Ram's ratings didn't drop much because they were already pretty low.

I do have to agree with Mopar212222. Many are clueless when it comes to towing.

@AD - Ram faired better than Toyota but Toyota complied right away so it was expected to drop. Ram, Ford, and GM pulled out of compliance and have had plenty of time to prepare. The switch to coils on Ram lowered ratings which most likely would of happened with compliance.

I LOVE This article......... Ram "claiming they were first LOL LOL ...... TOYOTA was first to adhere "across the board, all trucks, all suv's....... Ram is a follower not a leader in this respect.......

For those people who look at the world through rose colored glasses, as always Toyota is being modest just like with fuel economy numbers. They dont have to push the issue just like cafe numbers because overall they arent in danger of having to pay penalties for bad cafe average....

Posted by: hemi lol | Jul 16, 2014 1:00:26 PM

@AD

As Lou said, Toyota implemented the standards right away without changing anything which I applaud them for that back then even though I think that some of the standards should be even more strict. If all the other truck makes followed suit at that time then I would bet a lot of them would have dropped even further. Instead they had time to improve their trucks to meet the standards so they will not have as much of a hit.

Take the 2010 Ram Hemi Crew Cab SLT with a 3.92 rear axle. At the time Ram had the 545RFE 5 speed transmission in that truck and Ram rated that truck to tow 10,050lbs. Since then they have made a slight increase in power in the Hemi, they took off power robbing parts like hydraulic power steering, and they upgraded to the 8HP70 8 speed transmission. This combination gives the same exact configured Ram SLT a 10,300lbs tow rating. This leads me to believe that if they would have adopted the J2807 standards at the the same time as the Tundra then Ram would have had a significant drop just as the others would have.

Posted by: ALL1 | Jul 16, 2014 1:30:03 PM

@Lou_BC

I here you and I agree but one with one problem and that is Toyota could have waited for the 14 model to do the rating and the result would have been the same since the truck is the same.

@ hemi lol
If you take a math test and I take a math test and I get a 90 and you get a 85 would you say that I was showing off and you were being conservative? Can you admit that you did your best but someone did better? Why do you feel the need to crap on other peoples numbers without proof of what you are saying? If Toyota wants better numbers than rework the Tundra mechanically where needed and take both or either the EPA rating and SAE tow rating test again. Believe the guy with a supercharged 5.7L when he says he would bet he most proud of Toyota on here if they did but I will not make excuses for them or go with the lame excuses you and Mike Sweers have given due to a lack of mechanical progression with the 3rd Gen Tundra.

Posted by: AD | Jul 16, 2014 1:34:13 PM

LOL, still trying to discredit Ram.

Those saying Toyota already did this, well Toyota only sells the half ton, they have no 3/4 ton or 1 ton so yes Ram is the first to use the new standard across the all three series, the 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton and the 1 ton trucks.

I said a while back I bet Ram does not lose as much as the others because they were thinking ahead and were developing the trucks with the new standards in mind.

Looks like I was correct after all.

By the way the two rating for my 2014 Ram Pentastar V-6 is 7300 pounds, the 2015 Ram Pentastar V-6 gains capacity and is up to 7600 pounds a gain of 300 extra pounds.

Way to go Ram.

Posted by: Ram Big Horn 1500 | Jul 16, 2014 2:38:21 PM

Here is a couple of vids showing how the F150 does against the whimpy Ram 1500. Once again showing just because you have a higher towing rating doesn't mean you can tow better, the f150 gets out towed in both vids by a lower tow rated Ram.

@papa jim,
Those figures are certainly Biblical The SAE standard is I think a PR Tool for the Companies. This standard has replaced "magic dust" as a determinant for towing abilities. The proposed standard had a lot of questionable criteria, now that actually has been born out, with these figures

Posted by: Robert Ryan | Jul 16, 2014 5:26:34 PM

@mileage man
How right you are, GVWR can be arbitrary, making the GCVWR as equally arbitary

Posted by: Robert Ryan | Jul 16, 2014 5:32:12 PM

Gee now that Ram has complied with the new regulations on all three lines the 1/2 ton, 3/4 ton and the 1 ton trucks making them the first to apply the new rating across all three lines as stated and they did not take the huge hit the Ram haters were hoping for the excuses come pouring out how the new standard is no good blah blah blah.

When Fiat purchased Chrysler I been in question to how much Fiat would have to do with Ram’s next design. I know trucks need smaller less boxy front ends but the new spy shot on Autoblog is going to take some time to grow on me.

I don't see Chevy roundly kicking Rams rear end as some seem to think.

Posted by: Ram Big Horn 1500 | Jul 16, 2014 5:55:18 PM

Good job RAM!!!

Posted by: mp | Jul 16, 2014 6:03:59 PM

@Ram Big Horn 1500

Why are you only posting Ram's towing numbers for regular cabs that are higher than the crew cabs for Rams?

Also, why are you purposely choosing numbers numbers for the competitors to make yours look good? You say "V-8 4x4 3.73 gear 10,800 lbs.", but the if you guy by the highest number for that truck(which you are doing with your Ram then it would be 12,000lbs with the 6.2L. So why cherry pick? Why don't you post facts if you are going to truly compare?

Posted by: ALL1 | Jul 16, 2014 6:37:25 PM

@Me

In the first video, the base Ram V6 coupled with the 8 speed transmission will wins hands down to the F150 base V6 with a 6 speed. There is no surprise there since both engine are really close in power yet the Ram V6 has 2 extra gears to utilise.

However, the second video is with an old 5.4L engine that has not been put in F150's since 2010 year models. Do you have any videos of current engines?

Posted by: ALL1 | Jul 16, 2014 6:42:27 PM

@All1

Those numbers were pulled from the Ram article and the Chevy Article both right from this web page on both manufactures saying their 2015 trucks will be J2807 rated.

You have a problem with those numbers take it up with PickupTruck.com.

Posted by: Ram Big Horn 1500 | Jul 16, 2014 8:40:21 PM

@Ram Big Horn 1500-aka Hemi V8- aka Hemi- aka Ram For the Win - aka your not fooling anybody with the multiple names so what is the point.....

That is not an excuse. In the very same article about the GM, PUTC states "For a more detailed description of the Chevy and GMC's announcement, click here (Chevy) or here (GMC)."

Which brings you to this link that has all the info at the bottom......

Congratulations to RAM.
First with 1/2 ton diesel, first with J2807 ratings across the all trucks. Ford needs to make it from aluminum to meet J2807 payload and towing ratings. The magic dust disappears quickly.

They are going to the be the last one with 1/2 ton diesel in 2019, when all the gasoline engines turbos are destroyed.

J2807 does not address payload capacity. GCWR is not GVWR. The standard is absolutely silent on payload.

@Robert Ryan

GVWR is a complete make believe number, which is why I stated that GAWR should be used by those who wish to load their trucks heavily. GCWR is really the whole point of this standard, its now measured in a standardized fashion and no longer make believe.

I think the pentastar ram really looks impressive on paper, and at least on paper would seem to be the superior choice to the ecodiesel for anyone running a cost/performance analysis.

Posted by: Mileage Man | Jul 16, 2014 10:13:33 PM

@ AD

Its very easy for me to say they are being conservative since mechanically they are superior in every way. thats old hat. better powerband, transmission tuning, cooling for engine and trans, bigger brakes, bigger rear diff, far superior rear suspension design. seems typical to me that they would figure a way to continue the one upmanship....... Toyota IS conservative and they are being here as well. take it from a guy who knows how they are built.... what does having the supercharger have to do with anything? im suppose to believe you more because of parts on your truck? maybe you didnt mean it that way but thats how it sounds.... i have thousands of adds on my truck too but that doesnt mean diddly.

Posted by: hemi lol | Jul 16, 2014 11:32:25 PM

@ hemi lol
I guess I am supposed to believe you because you said it and your a Toyota salesman? I know many of Toyota salesman and they know little about every truck. I guess what you say means jack. Since you know everything please explain the three biggest problems of the 2nd Gen Tundra 1. AIP, 2. Blown Steering Racks and 3. Warped rotors. Just to remind you that all 1/2 tons have problems and all were engineered by very smart people. Now maybe you don't mean to make yourself seem like a fanboi who cannot admit when his company has been outdone and try harder the next time but that is how you come across.

Posted by: AD | Jul 17, 2014 12:15:04 AM

Standardization in ratings is a very good thing.

Posted by: Clint | Jul 17, 2014 12:32:48 AM

@Clint

I agree with you there, but I think the test should be a little more strict on the minimum speed limit in the hill climbing portion. Currently it is 40mph and I think it should be set at a 55 mph or at least 50mph minimum. Only being able to do 40 mph at a vehicles max towing capability is unacceptable to me and on some highways it is illegal.

Here is a couple of vids showing how the F150 does against the whimpy Ram 1500. Once again showing just because you have a higher towing rating doesn't mean you can tow better, the f150 gets out towed in both vids by a lower tow rated Ram.